Author Topic: Gun Control?  (Read 19080 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #180 on: February 20, 2018, 01:09:45 PM »

Offline chicagoceltic

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 626
  • Tommy Points: 83
What concerns me is that Scalia's D.C. vs. Heller ruling in 2008 (?) basically affirmed a constitutional right for private citizens to bear arms with little restriction. My worry is that the gun reform we need would end up running up against that decision and the second amendment (as it's now interpreted) at large. Meaning we need to reexamine that amendment and I'm not sure that can happen in my lifetime.

Secondly, even if we implement strict gun control regulations, there are still SO MANY GUNS in the U.S. I am very confident I could get my hands on a high-caliber rifle through secondhand means if I really wanted one. So while I agree we need better measures - that's a must - I'm not sure that's enough. But I think as soon as we start talking "confiscation" people will start claiming TRYANNICAL GOVERNMENT.
A common refrain from people who are against any sort of gun control is that criminals will still get the guns.  While that is certain to be true for some/many common street criminals I feel as though the "average mass shooter" are worlds away from common street criminals and that most would have no idea how to get black market guns.  I know I would not have the first guess on where to illegally purchase guns.

(Note: I absolutely hated typing "average mass shooter" as it seems to normalize these horrible acts as every day events.)
Pub Draft

Sam N Ella's

At the Bar: The Most Interesting Man in the World
At the Door:  Hugh Hefner
On Stage:  O.A.R., Louis C.K., EDGAR! Special Drinks:  Irish Car Bomb, Martinis On Tap: Lite, Beamish, 3 Floyds Seasonal, Chimay Grand Reserve, Spotted Cow

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #181 on: February 20, 2018, 01:10:45 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34986
  • Tommy Points: -27820
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Also, as Roy stated, who determined which psychiatric diseases disqualifies someone from ownership. There's a lot of mental illnesses and even with the same diagnosis there are varying degrees.

Yeah, my wife is a psychiatric clinician, and I asked her which diagnoses she would absolutely restrict guns from. The only two she would unequivocally bar were Antisocial personality disorder and schizophrenia.  Others were case by case.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #182 on: February 20, 2018, 01:27:53 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32690
  • Tommy Points: 5371
Also, as Roy stated, who determined which psychiatric diseases disqualifies someone from ownership. There's a lot of mental illnesses and even with the same diagnosis there are varying degrees.

Yeah, my wife is a psychiatric clinician, and I asked her which diagnoses she would absolutely restrict guns from. The only two she would unequivocally bar were Antisocial personality disorder and schizophrenia.  Others were case by case.
That seems reasonable.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #183 on: February 20, 2018, 01:29:12 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20435
  • Tommy Points: 518

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #184 on: February 20, 2018, 01:40:27 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32690
  • Tommy Points: 5371

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #185 on: February 20, 2018, 02:28:17 PM »

Offline seancally

  • Marcus Smart
  • Posts: 215
  • Tommy Points: 24
What concerns me is that Scalia's D.C. vs. Heller ruling in 2008 (?) basically affirmed a constitutional right for private citizens to bear arms with little restriction. My worry is that the gun reform we need would end up running up against that decision and the second amendment (as it's now interpreted) at large. Meaning we need to reexamine that amendment and I'm not sure that can happen in my lifetime.

Secondly, even if we implement strict gun control regulations, there are still SO MANY GUNS in the U.S. I am very confident I could get my hands on a high-caliber rifle through secondhand means if I really wanted one. So while I agree we need better measures - that's a must - I'm not sure that's enough. But I think as soon as we start talking "confiscation" people will start claiming TRYANNICAL GOVERNMENT.
A common refrain from people who are against any sort of gun control is that criminals will still get the guns.  While that is certain to be true for some/many common street criminals I feel as though the "average mass shooter" are worlds away from common street criminals and that most would have no idea how to get black market guns.  I know I would not have the first guess on where to illegally purchase guns.

(Note: I absolutely hated typing "average mass shooter" as it seems to normalize these horrible acts as every day events.)

I hear your point, and I mean... I don't really want to type "guns black market" into Google in case I end up on some list somewhere. But that might be the start.

There are a few pieces (with basic, cursory research on my part) that speak to the issue you raise:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.6e3858c008c6

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/07/it-took-me-two-hours-to-get-ak-47-black-market-welcome-to-america

I want to be clear: I think we need stricter laws, fewer guns, etc - I think it should be really, really hard to get a weapon. And I think certain types of guns (like the AR-15) never need to be in civilian hands. And if you're worried about a tyrannical gov't going crazy, your gun won't save you anyway. But I also recognize the counter-arguments and that they'll need to be addressed for action to occur.
"The game honors toughness." - President Stevens

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #186 on: February 20, 2018, 02:57:11 PM »

Offline number_n9ne

  • Gordon Hayward
  • Posts: 671
  • Tommy Points: 88
  • #StayWoke
What concerns me is that Scalia's D.C. vs. Heller ruling in 2008 (?) basically affirmed a constitutional right for private citizens to bear arms with little restriction. My worry is that the gun reform we need would end up running up against that decision and the second amendment (as it's now interpreted) at large. Meaning we need to reexamine that amendment and I'm not sure that can happen in my lifetime.

Secondly, even if we implement strict gun control regulations, there are still SO MANY GUNS in the U.S. I am very confident I could get my hands on a high-caliber rifle through secondhand means if I really wanted one. So while I agree we need better measures - that's a must - I'm not sure that's enough. But I think as soon as we start talking "confiscation" people will start claiming TRYANNICAL GOVERNMENT.
A common refrain from people who are against any sort of gun control is that criminals will still get the guns.  While that is certain to be true for some/many common street criminals I feel as though the "average mass shooter" are worlds away from common street criminals and that most would have no idea how to get black market guns.  I know I would not have the first guess on where to illegally purchase guns.

(Note: I absolutely hated typing "average mass shooter" as it seems to normalize these horrible acts as every day events.)

I hear your point, and I mean... I don't really want to type "guns black market" into Google in case I end up on some list somewhere. But that might be the start.

There are a few pieces (with basic, cursory research on my part) that speak to the issue you raise:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/?utm_term=.6e3858c008c6

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/07/it-took-me-two-hours-to-get-ak-47-black-market-welcome-to-america

I want to be clear: I think we need stricter laws, fewer guns, etc - I think it should be really, really hard to get a weapon. And I think certain types of guns (like the AR-15) never need to be in civilian hands. And if you're worried about a tyrannical gov't going crazy, your gun won't save you anyway. But I also recognize the counter-arguments and that they'll need to be addressed for action to occur.

This is so rational and commonsensical. I appreciate this. This is a point of view that many can learn from.
"I don't really have an ego. I have a presence and aura about me that's very reality-based."

-Zen Master Kyrie

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #187 on: February 20, 2018, 03:28:59 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20435
  • Tommy Points: 518
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/us/gun-owners-destroy-guns/index.html
Good for these people. That's pretty respectable things to do.

Yes. Whats sad is some gun pro folks who mock these people under comments on fb

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #188 on: February 20, 2018, 03:58:59 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17871
  • Tommy Points: 1287
Itís unreasonable because itís intrusive and overly broad.

Should every American have to pass a psychiatric exam to vote? To go to church? To engage in free speech? To have access to habeas corpus or a court-appointed attorney?

What mental health diagnoses should be disqualifying? Who makes that assessment? Who pays for it?
So which one of these behaviors provides you the means to hurt large amounts of people really fast?

You already have psych screening for police officers. I don't find it unreasonable to treat candidate gun owners the way you treat candidate policemen.

Becoming a member of law enforcement is a career choice. Owning a gun is a Constitutional right.
So are life and liberty, but the federal government has found a way to execute and imprison people.

Frankly, if the constitution is an obstacle to sensible gun reform, perhaps it's time to explore amending the constitution again. It's not like it hasn't been done dozens of times already.
(Formerly) managing Rilski Sportist to glory at http://www.buzzerbeater.com

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #189 on: February 20, 2018, 03:59:38 PM »

Offline Eddie20

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8019
  • Tommy Points: 860
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/us/gun-owners-destroy-guns/index.html
Good for these people. That's pretty respectable things to do.

Yes. Whats sad is some gun pro folks who mock these people under comments on fb

It's a silly reaction, which basically blames the firearm. A better approach, although it wouldn't be as sensational, would be to sell it to a police department (plenty of gun buy programs) and send the proceeds to a victim's go fund me.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #190 on: February 20, 2018, 04:05:25 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32690
  • Tommy Points: 5371
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/us/gun-owners-destroy-guns/index.html
Good for these people. That's pretty respectable things to do.

Yes. Whats sad is some gun pro folks who mock these people under comments on fb

It's a silly reaction, which basically blames the firearm. A better approach, although it wouldn't be as sensational, would be to sell it to a police department (plenty of gun buy programs) and send the proceeds to a victim's go fund me.
Sensational is necessary if you want to have more hits and push the message more.

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #191 on: February 20, 2018, 04:20:30 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34986
  • Tommy Points: -27820
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Itís unreasonable because itís intrusive and overly broad.

Should every American have to pass a psychiatric exam to vote? To go to church? To engage in free speech? To have access to habeas corpus or a court-appointed attorney?

What mental health diagnoses should be disqualifying? Who makes that assessment? Who pays for it?
So which one of these behaviors provides you the means to hurt large amounts of people really fast?

You already have psych screening for police officers. I don't find it unreasonable to treat candidate gun owners the way you treat candidate policemen.

Becoming a member of law enforcement is a career choice. Owning a gun is a Constitutional right.
So are life and liberty, but the federal government has found a way to execute and imprison people.

Frankly, if the constitution is an obstacle to sensible gun reform, perhaps it's time to explore amending the constitution again. It's not like it hasn't been done dozens of times already.

The problem with amending it, as a practical matter, is that it only takes 13 states to veto.

Thatís why any reforms need to be done with the assumption that gun ownership is a Constitutional right.  The harder reforms make it to get a gun, the less likely they are to be upheld.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #192 on: February 20, 2018, 04:37:44 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20435
  • Tommy Points: 518
Itís unreasonable because itís intrusive and overly broad.

Should every American have to pass a psychiatric exam to vote? To go to church? To engage in free speech? To have access to habeas corpus or a court-appointed attorney?

What mental health diagnoses should be disqualifying? Who makes that assessment? Who pays for it?
So which one of these behaviors provides you the means to hurt large amounts of people really fast?

You already have psych screening for police officers. I don't find it unreasonable to treat candidate gun owners the way you treat candidate policemen.

Becoming a member of law enforcement is a career choice. Owning a gun is a Constitutional right.
So are life and liberty, but the federal government has found a way to execute and imprison people.

Frankly, if the constitution is an obstacle to sensible gun reform, perhaps it's time to explore amending the constitution again. It's not like it hasn't been done dozens of times already.

The problem with amending it, as a practical matter, is that it only takes 13 states to veto.

Thatís why any reforms need to be done with the assumption that gun ownership is a Constitutional right.  The harder reforms make it to get a gun, the less likely they are to be upheld.

How hard was it for Clinton to ban assault rifles?

Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #193 on: February 20, 2018, 04:55:41 PM »

Offline triboy16f

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20435
  • Tommy Points: 518
Trump pushes for ban on gun 'bump stocks'


Re: Gun Control?
« Reply #194 on: February 20, 2018, 05:03:42 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34986
  • Tommy Points: -27820
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Trump pushes for ban on gun 'bump stocks'

Sensible as a small measure, but much too little.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...